Total Pageviews

Wednesday, 30 July 2014

Let me first of all get this out of the way. I am a huge fan of Joe Castro's previous work. Everything from 'Terror Toons' to 'The Jackhammer Massacre" and back again. When I first heard about Joe Castro working on 'The Summer of Massacre', I assumed it was to be a remake of an absolutely godawful British film called 'The Summer of the Massacre', which begins with bad spelling and punctuation in the prologue, has actors that can barely be called as such, and the supposed gore is non-existent. Couple that with a killer who is blatantly a rip-off of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre's Leatherface, and you have a movie that really doesn't deserve a remake.

Luckily, Joe decided to create his own 'Experience' (the film works so much better this way, as it is something that does test the nerve of splatter fans) and what we have is even in the Guinness Book of Records for having the highest body count of any single movie, which is one hundred and fifty-five on-screen kills. Joe also pushes the envelope with digital effects, which more often than not work incredibly well, but more on that later.

The film is a horrific experience, and if you aren't a fan of indiscriminate violence, revenge or experimental cinema, you won't find much to like here. What Joe does is push the very boundaries of on-screen violence far beyond anything you have ever seen before. The film is incredibly experimental in it's camera work. violence, special FX and even it's structure. This is something incredibly different for low budget cinema, and it is great to see directors out there willing to push their boundaries to achieve their goals.The outcome is insane to say the least. Murder after murder, not a minute goes by without someone meeting a grisly end. This movie delivers the carnage like no other.

Now, lets get to the digital FX that so many reviewers seem to complain about. Some of the digital FX are fantastic, but others are noticeable and don't work as well, simply because as Joe was making the film, he was learning how to create digital FX, and some of the FX were made before he had learned everything he needed to know. I guarantee you though, the early FX take nothing away from the film whatsoever, and it would be silly of anyone to dismiss this experimental experience because of this small thing.. It remains a brutal, misanthropic and deviant piece of cinema that manages to push the mind into a darkness very rarely created by horror cinema. An ability to overlook small things (that really won't ruin your enjoyment of the film if you did pay attention to them) will make you realise just how ambitious and brutal this film really is.

Every story contained within 'The Summer of Massacre will have something all horror fans will love. The first story tells the tale of a man who is beaten and killed, who just so happens to come back and murder indiscriminately. The second story is about a disabled girl who is killed by her prettier sister, and comes back for revenge. The third story contains what is probably the most frightening zombie since the days of the Lucio Fulci and Gianetto De Rossi, and the fourth story is homage to the slasher movies of old. The wrap-around story tells the tale of three killers and their final hours. Joe's love for horror really seeps from every scene, and it impossible not to see the passion in this blood spattered experience.

So much more than a movie, this is experimental art that pushes the boundaries of on-screen violence way past the point of no return, and I for one salute Joe Castro for doing something different, and something that every horror fan can enjoy if they are willing to experience the horror show Joe has given us without passing a fickle judgement on what lies before them.

Monday, 28 July 2014

What the hell has happened to Moviepilot? I wrote a number of articles for them last year sometime, and generally received great feedback. Lately, I have been noticing more and more articles that have very little basis in fact. The majority of them are speculative to say the least, while some are total bullshit.

There has been an article posted on Moviepilot, where the administrator of Moviepilot Horror, Amy Martin, wrote an article claiming that Rob Zombie had been shooting his mouth off saying how his version of Halloween was so much better than John Carpenter's original. It seems the article has been removed, which goes to show just how wrong it was. Below, you can see Rob Zombie's reply to this poorly written article full of lies and statements taken completely out of context.

"Who
ever wrote this (Amy Martin) is a trouble making cunt. I love John
Carpenter's Halloween and John knows that. Why? Because I told him. In
fact he was the first person I called and told about my film. He said he was cool with it. I actually said to him "if this is a problem, I won't do it". Simple as that.

I
have never compared the two films and never will. Taking a bunch of
things I said years before I even made the film to try and start trouble
is typical internet nonsense. I never pointed out flaws in the
original. I pointed out things that weren't in the original that I could
put in mine. Not because I thought my way was better, but because I
thought it would be different. Since I figured trying to make the exact
same film was sort of silly.

Here
is cute quote from this bullshit article "I don't want to jump to
conclusions, but I would say that Zombie is totally lying when he says
that he likes and respects the original Halloween, but is just saying
that for fear of losing fans if he said otherwise."

I think that says it all. The fact she has the audacity to even hint that Zombie has no respect for Carpenter's Halloween shows that this lady is out for Zombie's blood, and is obviously not a fan of his work at all. I followed Zombie's remake of Halloween very closely, and remember reading that he actually went to John Carpenter and asked his permission to do certain things with the film, and John Carpenter's reply was "Make it your own". Anyone who has seen Zombie's remake can see the passion for the original material, whilst also building on the bricks Carpenter laid in '78.

Any writer will agree that it is always best to be unbiased. Just because you hate something (and I really don't see the point in hating anything that is out of your control) then don't watch/read/listen to/look at it. Why anyone would waste time to write an article full of lies is beyond me (I didn't realize the Daily Mail and Moviepilot were so closely linked).It is a shame it had to come to Rob Zombie commenting on the article for everyone to see that none of the things stated in the article are true. Hopefully this makes other writers sit up and take note. Lies, trying to stir the shit pot and sensationalizing things will not get you anywhere, because there is always someone out there who will put you right.

I extend my middle finger to Moviepilot, and I hope they know that I personally will not be writing for them again for the simple fact that this article contained so much rubbish and not an ounce of truth, and every other article I see is either speculation or stolen from another news site. If they ever start promoting original content again by people who can actually type coherent sentences and try and give up trying to make the rumour mill move faster, then I might consider reading what they post. Until then, I will avoid everything they put out. If that offends anyone, then so be it, but I will not be a part of something that gives voices to ill-informed people with a basic grasp of writing pouring out their silly and immature vendettas in the form of thinly veiled articles/attacks on filmmakers. #Darkest regards......Dani.

Friday, 25 July 2014

It's finally here! The trailer for 'See No Evil 2', directed by Jen and Sylvia Soska and starring WWE Superstar Kane as Jacob Goodnight, Danielle Harris and Katherine Isabelle, looks incredible. While I wasn't that impressed with the first film (it had a couple of decent kills, but was hampered by a story that took far too long to go anywhere) I love the character of Jacob Goodnight, and he looks even more pissed off in this sequel. The addition of a mask also makes the character that much creepier. Check the trailer out below.

Thursday, 24 July 2014

James Balsamo's 'I Spill your Guts' is in my eyes at least, a classic low budget exploitation movie that manages to please on so many levels, be they aesthetic, storywise, nudity-wise and splatter, the man delivered! So it is with great anticipation that I can reveal that James Balsamo has set up an indiegogo campaign up for 'I Spill your Guts 2', as he wants to make it a theatrical release, which I am sure will please all of his fans out there. The Indiegogo project ends on September 20th, so get sharing and donating!

Here is the synopsis from the man himself :-

"A
blood-crazed vigilante is carving through New York's political empire,
dismembering one corrupt politician after another. Only known as the
American Executioner, this mask-wearing maniac is fueled by revenge to
kill a senator who he blames for losing his voice and the suicide of his
fiancé. This hooded assassin, with nothing to loose, has his sight set
on the sex-craved senator whose lust for big-breasted women may cost him
more than his political career. As he disembowels money-hungry
sleazebags, no one is safe from this savage military mercenary. Tortured
by the voices in his head and haunted by the ghosts of his victims, the
only way to bring closure to his madness is to paint the city red with
revenge. A hero to some and a nightmare to others, The American
Executioner is lurking the streets. Just hope he's not coming for you in
I Spill Your Guts 2"

Now the only thing left to do is get donating and/or spread the word about this amazing project!

You can find the 'I Spill your Guts 2' Indiegogo by clicking HERE. And please, don't forget to share it with all your horror and exploitation loving friends. Please!James Balsamo is a true visionary. We have all seen that he is very capable of making great cinema with very little money. Let's see what he can unleash on the world this time! The indie uprising has begun, and James is leading the charge!Darkest regards......Dani.

Tuesday, 22 July 2014

'Pieces of Talent' is the latest movie from writer/director Joe Stauffer. As many fans of horror know. originality doesn't come easy in the horror genre, but I have to mention just how original the premise of this film sounds. The fact I have seen it described as 'Beautiful Horror' has certainly made me even more interested in seeing the film, as beauty in horror always fascinates me, and is rarely something that filmmakers manage to achieve. I definitely recommend checking this film out. Check out the synopsis below, and then visit the official website and go and 'Like' the Facebook page too.

Set in the small coastal town of Bright Leaf, North Carolina, 'Pieces of
Talent' centers around Charlotte (Kristi Ray), a disillusioned aspiring actress
working a night job as a cocktail waitress in order to make ends meet.
Charlotte catches a break when seemingly chance circumstances put her in
contact with a local filmmaker, David Long (David Long). David and Charlotte form a
quick friendship that leads to Charlotte landing the starring role in
David’s newest project. David quickly becomes obsessed with Charlotte
and begins building his bloody masterpiece. He films each encounter with
the ultimate goal of filming Charlotte as his final installment. David
is a happily obsessed individual willing to do whatever it takes to make
“true art”. He utilizes his charm and skills to make something dark and
deranged seem utterly beautiful and loving.

Saturday, 19 July 2014

Facebook horror groups. Many are the bane of horror fans everywhere, with their continuous posts reviling 'A Serbian Film' and any remake they come across, whilst posting idiotic 'battles' between two horror villains, such as 'Pinhead versus Leatherface' for example. Michael 'Mad Mike' Nagy wrote an excellent post explaining where horror pages on Facebook let everyone down, and also of the incredibly small minded attitudes you face on there. I do suggest reading it, as he explains very well the exploits of these pages and how they effect horror fans, both new and old. (Click HERE read his post).

There are also questions which seem to crop up all of the time on horror pages, and these are sometimes informative, but mostly just go over the same things again and again. For example, I myself was banned from a horror page for saying that 'Blade Runner' isn't a horror film. When I made the point that both 'Predator' and 'The Terminator' have more elements of horror than the aforementioned movie, I was laughed at. In the end, I got kicked, and that was that. One thing that bothered me was that I was never given a single reason as to why this person considered 'Blade Runner' a horror film. It just was. I tried seeing things from this persons point of view, but unfortunately my head wouldn't reach my rectum, and I haven't yet had a glass stomach fitted that would aid me visually should I try and see things somebody elses way again.

A very common question asked, is "What is the sickest horror film ever"? I think this is a difficult question to answer, not at least because people find different things sickening. It could be rape, dismemberment, child killing. I know 'A Serbian Film' features all three of these (and other things which totally break the boundaries of taste) but I in no way consider it to be the sickest film made.

There is only one film that deserves that title to this day, and I still feel it has such power, and is completely timeless in it's commentary on humanity. That film is 'Cannibal Holocaust'. It shows the sickness every man and woman possesses when confronted with something different, and the idea that they can control other humans, and do what they will with them without any repercussions. It is this realism, that strikes a chord with me and turns my stomach every time. Compared to 'A Serbian Film's' over the top content, 'Cannibal Holocaust' might look tame to some, but I deny anyone not to be effected in some way by the idea of superiority of an advanced civilization to that of a tribe, where the people from the apparently more intelligent part of the world come across as primitive beyond belief. This 'sickness' seems to be inherent in many around the world, and because the film shows it so well, certainly manages to chill the spines of many horror fans, whilst the behaviour, actions and finally deaths of the films protagonists definitely fill the gore quota.

I know the film features real animal deaths, but I understand all of the animals were eaten by the cast and crew. These deaths are again chilling, but it is no different to what goes on in abattoirs around the world. I am not condoning animal cruelty in any shape or form, and perhaps the murder of the Muskrat definitely goes too far, it is a true and again very fitting commentary on our behaviour that still exists to this day.

This is only my view don't forget, and I am sure there are many of you out there who will say just how wrong I am, and start mentioning titles such as 'Salo' or 'Nekromantik', but I can honestly say that none of those films have had the same effect on me.

Another question that seems to be asked alot is "I am just getting into horror. What should I watch"? What I am going to do next, is make some suggestions to anyone that hasn't seen many horror films, what they should think about watching. Again, this is just my opinion, so agree or disagree. That's your prerogative.

'Nosferatu' (1922). This expressionistic horror classic deserves to be seen by everyone. What it manages to achieve is far beyond any other silent film. There are shots featured in films that are taken from 'Nosferatu' to this very day. The atmosphere is enveloping, dark and brooding, and the characters, especially Count Orlok, imprint themselves on your very being (or at least in your nightmares).

'The Phantom of the Opera' (1925). Beautiful photography coupled with a truly chilling villain make 'The Phantom of the Opera' another horror film that should be viewed by everyone. The make up alone (devised by Lon Chaney, who also plays the phantom) is enough to make a grown man quiver in fear. Everything about this film screams 'Grandeur', and the sets seen in the film are nothing short of beautiful. Again, the film oozes atmosphere and creates such a feeling of horror, it will take you a while to get over what you have just seen.

'Black Sunday' (1960). Mario Bava manages to mix the gothic sensibilities of Hammer with a precursor to the gore seen in later Italian horror films. The opening scene alone is enough to make anyone squirm, and the atmosphere is think and suffocating throughout the entirety of the movie.

'Blood Feast' (1963). Herschell Gordon Lewis' first splatter film might be considered silly by todays standards, but I still consider it a classic. While there have been many films that have been much gorier, 'Blood Feast' bares the title of having done it first. Just watch to see pretty ladies meet a grisly end, and the birth of 'Splatter'. I feel those are reason enough for this to be on every budding horror fans list.

'Night of the Living Dead' (1968). What 'Night of the Living Dead' did for horror was revolutionary. Gone were the superstitious locals, the gothic scenery, the castles shrouded in darkness. This was replaced with real people behaving in such a realistic manner, that horror was bought into a different realm altogether. Add flesh eating ghouls into the mix, and you have the birth of a new type of horror, and of the flesh eating zombie. That really does deserve to be seen by everyone.

'The Exorcist' (1973). A movie that still has the same power today that it had when it was first released, the term 'Horror' could never be more fitting than it is here. A simple slow burn story that manages to increase tension to unbearable levels whilst throwing in scares that are both expected and surprising makes 'The Exorcist' one of the greatest horror films of all time.

'Halloween' (1978). I still consider this the scariest movie I have ever seen, like a row of Jack-in-the-boxs all set up and perfectly timed to deliver once scare after the other, executed with a perfect sense of suspense and terror. Michael's mask acts as something we project our own fears on to, and while there is very little blood in this film, it doesn't need it. This film is the stuff nightmares are made of.

Hellraiser (1987). Possibly (with the exception of 'Dracula') the greatest love (or should that be lust) story ever told. Steeped in sexuality and gore, 'Hellraiser' is a horror film like no other. Yes, there is a man with pins covering his head on the cover, but the films story, of a man coming back from the dead, and his brothers lover helping him become whole again by murdering men, is one of obsession and lust. The Cenobites are images of S & M depravity, icons of a pure embodiment of torture and horror. Everything about this film screams horror, and I deny anyone to say that they didn't enjoy the gleefully gory and anatomically brilliant special effects on show.

I could go on, but getting into horror should be a journey you take by yourself. Discover what you like, what you don't. Don't let others have any bearing on your own tastes, and always, and I really do mean always, like what you like no matter what anyone else thinks. There will be people out there who tell you how wrong you are for liking something, but if it makes you happy, how can you be wrong.

Friday, 18 July 2014

From the producers of 'The Pyramid' (reviewed HERE) comes a new horror/body-melt movie called 'Alienween'. The movie will be directed by the talented Frederico Sfascia ('I REC U') and produced by Empire Video's Alex Visani.

Inspired by classic melt movies such as 'The Incredible Melting Man', 'The Stuff' and 'Street Trash', 'Alienween' will tell the story of a group of young guys who, during a Halloween party, will face a slimy invasion from outer space. 'Alienween' promises "Hot girls, slimy mutants, splatter, weird situations, Irony and lots of crazy effects!

The movie will be shot in Italy in September, and will be out at the end of 2014.

88 Films are releasing some classic films for us in the UK to finally get our hands on. This latest announcement will have slasher fans donning their hockey-masks and making their way to their nearest Blu-Ray/DVD stockist to purchase some incredibly over the top and boundary-pushing slasher movies.

The films being released as part of this collection are a digitally remastered DVD release of Don Ronquist's backwood slasher 'Unhinged', James Bryan's 'Don't Go In The Woods' on Blu-Ray, Herb Freed's Graduation Day on Blu-Ray and last but by no means least, Charles Kaufman's 'Mothers Day' on Blu-Ray. I am sure you will agree that it is fantastic that 88 Films is making an effort to release these movies from the blood spattered halcyon era of slasher movies.

Each release in this very special collection will boast a numbered spine, additional features, a reversible sleeve and an informative booklet with writing on each respective film from author Callum Waddell, producer of such films as 88 Films' own 'Slice and Dice: The Slasher Film Forever.

More importantly, 88 Films promise the films will be uncut and uncensored, with each death looking bloodier and better than ever before.

Wednesday, 16 July 2014

It bothers me that the word 'Metal' is used as an adjective. Let me get that right out of the way first of all. You don't hear other sub-cultures describing things as 'Chavy' or 'Post Hardcore' do you? But it seems that the word 'Metal' is becoming synonymous with behaving in a certain way, or thinking in a certain way, or descibing things in a certain way. How does this make anything 'Metal'? Isn't metal about freedom of expression, about being unrestrained from the chains of society? About being an individual, and not following trends or paths others have trodden before you?

Maybe it's just me, or even perhaps it's because I am getting older, but I have noticed music publications have been adopting this trend of calling things 'Metal', posting lists of 'The top ten most Metal films' or 'The top five most Metal places to visit'. What makes a film 'Metal'? Is it if it features stone writing in the title sequence? Someone screaming expletives in an aggressive tone? Perhaps demons and fire and semi naked women make it metal.

It seems the younger generation of metal fans (and those who feel the need to try and be 'cool') tend to adopt 'Metal' as a lifestyle. They then think the behaviour they portray is expected of them (be this getting extremely drunk, breaking things, or playing their music loud on the bus and shouting at anyone who gives them funny looks, fighting etc). While these things can be typified as typical human behaviour, they are at the extreme end of that very definition. How this can garner respect from their peers I will never understand. It's like applauding a friend for cutting off one of their fingers, or cheering them on as they disembowel themselves.

Maybe it makes the youth of today to feel accepted. To be 'Metal' is another way of generalising humanity. Another group to slot individuals into, and typify their behaviour. As humans, we do this with everything, as making lists of things helps us to get things in order in our minds. But I dislike to be put into a certain group of anything. I feel I don't need to be generalised. I don't need to be a part of a certain something, because that is only picking the parts of me that might appeal to others , whilst completely ignoring any flaws, which are also an inherent part of humanity.

The term 'Metal', when it refers to metal fans behaving or dressing a certain way, is very restricting, at least to young people who adopt the term today. In the 70's, Metal bands wore flares, flowery shirts and such like. In the 80's, it was all about tight jeans or spandex, long flowing hair (on men and women) and band t-shirts. Along with this rise of Heavy Metal, came Glam-Metal. Bands tried their hardest to look feminine, wearing lipstick, lycra, make-up and pouting any time a picture was taken of them. In the early 90's came death metal, where bands typically wore street clothes, such as combats, band/movie t-shirts etc. When Nu-Metal came along in the mid-late 90's, hip hop fashion was adopted by metal fans, as well as track suits (because Jonathan Davis from Korn always wore one) and baseball caps. I wonder if anyone using 'Metal' as an adjective would ever consider someone dressed in any of the aforementioned styles 'Metal'?

On the subject of clothing, let me tell you a little story about a night out I went on. We walked into our local rock club, which was populated by anyone with an 'Alternative' look, or 'a freak' as we were often called. My first stop, as always was the bar. There was a young guy at the bar, and I noticed everyone giving him funny looks because he was decked out in a baseball cap and tracksuit. I was wearing a Morbid Angel t-shirt, and this guy smiled at me and came and stood next to me whilst I ordered drinks. He told me how much he loved Morbid Angel, and how he saw them when David Vincent sung for them (Steve Tucker was the vocalist for them back then) and we had rather an interesting conversation about death metal. Later that night, people decided to mosh to Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit', and I noticed some bespectacled guy in black lipstick pull the guy with the tracksuit into the middle of the room. As soon as the chorus hit, everybody began laying into him, pulling him around, pushing him with a genuine anger. The guy in the tracksuit had a huge smile on his face and was loving it, but the atmosphere definitely turned sour, and the look on some of the patrons faces was of pure disgust and hatred.

Why was this person victimised? Was it because he wasn't 'Metal'? Because talking to him, he was certainly well versed in the death metal bands of the 90's that's for sure. It wasn't because of the way he acted. It was because he epitomised everything anyone in that club despised by the way he dressed. That is what happens when things are generalised and a certain type of behaviour is expected of someone. I was disgusted that night, and didn't manage to see the guy again that night, or on any other of my visits to this club. But it made me realise something. That it doesn't matter if you are 'Metal' or 'Chav' or what ever other group you are going to place yourself in. It isn't going to make you any kinder if you are a metalhead, or someone who doesn't like metal at all. Liking a certain style of music has no bearing on anyones personality whatsoever. That is a fact. If you are a nice person, then you are a nice person. If you are an asshole, then whatever you do, that's the way you come across no matter your interests.

Generalising thing's as 'Metal is going to do nothing but make any fan of heavy music feel more segregated in the long run, and create a divide simply because if you don't act how you are expected to act, then you won't be 'Metal' anymore at least in the opinions of others. Don't buy into this idiotic terminology. Don't break down what was once one of the most close-knit communities the world over. Don't act 'Metal', because there is no such thing. 'Metal' is not an adjective. It is a style of music (or a solid material that is typically hard, shiny, malleable, fusible and ductile, with good electrical and thermal conductivity if you wanted to be pedantic).

It seems I can asking more questions than coming to any conclusion as to why people describe things as 'Metal', so I ask you my readers, to share your opinion on this, and whether you have noticed it as I have, or if you think it is acceptable to label things as 'Metal', feel free to comment!!

Tuesday, 15 July 2014

There seems to be something wrong with a majority of horror film fans. It is becoming much more widespread, and seems to have people actually pre-empting the release of a movie with cries of "It's shit" or "How dare they remake MY favourite film. I won't see it". This is the sort ofstrange reaction to remakes that seems to be plaguing not only horror fans, but also fans of movies in general. People actually seem to think that if their favourite film is remade, then the original will disappear from existence, and all that will be left is the remake, which they have decided they will already hate because, well, nothing could ever be as good as their beloved original could it?

Now personally, there are certain films that have remakes, that have no reason to exist. Two glaring examples are American remake of the Spanish horror film 'REC', which is called 'Quarantine' and Gus Van Sant's remake of Hitchcock's 'Psycho'. I did buy 'Quarantine', and decided to watch it with commentary, only to hear one of the directors explain how he came up with certain camera angles that were used in the film. Now I don't claim to be incredibly intelligent, but it doesn't take a genius to see that Quarantine is a shot-for-shot remake of 'REC'. I have no idea how one of the directors could make the claim that he came up with camera angles when it is a carbon copy (apart from the demonic virus being replaced with a biological virus) of the much better Spanish film. This only made me dislike the film even more (the American film seemed void of everything that made the original 'REC' so enjoyable in the first place).

As for Van Sant's Psycho? I was always taught that if you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything, so I am going to keep quiet. I am sure that the majority of my readers will know exactly how I feel about that film, and might also share my opinion.

But look! The original films still exist! And more to the point, which ones are mentioned more? originals or remakes?? Van Sant's remake hardly gets a mention anywhere (possibly in some worst movie ever lists) and as for 'Quarantine', it sufferes the same fate, despite one of it's makers that the camera shots are original.

"What are you trying to say" you might ask.

I am attempting to show that no matter how bad (or good) a remake is, it does nothing to the original movie at all. It doesn't hurt it, doesn't taint it and it certainly doesn't make it disappear into an abyss filled with every bad remake out there. In fact, the remake might *SHOCK HORROR* make more people interested in seeking out the original film!! Imagine that! Your favourite film being seen and loved by more and more people. Isn't that a good thing? It all comes down to the fact that while people are very slow to give praise, people are very quick to put something down, and if they see others doing it, they feel accepted. A herd mentality. "Follow me, because I shout louder than anyone else, and I love the original film more than anyone else". Having a differing opinion about something may very well get you cast out into the horror netherworld, but when it is populated with people whose mouths are bigger than their tiny brains, that isn't such a bad thing.

Then there are movies that everyone seems to love, but they hardly ever mention the originals (either through ignorance, or not realising that the movies they are watching are remakes to begin with). Films like Carpenter's 'The Thing', released in 1982 (itself a remake of 'The Thing From Another World' which came out a whole thirty-two years before Carpenter's film), Cronenberg's 'The Fly', 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers', 'The Blob', 'Bram Stoker's Dracula', 'Mary Shelley's Frankenstein', 'The Mummy', 'The Omega Man', 'Nosferatu' (1979), 'The Toolbox Murders', '2001 Maniacs' and many more. I have rarely heard anyone belittle or put down these movies (apart from 'The Omega Man', which seems to be almost universally disliked). I also never hear these movies mentioned in the same breath as the original films, which is shocking, and the original movies these films are remaking are pretty damn good too.

Then there are films which actually improve upon the movies on which they are based. Alexandre Aja's retelling of Wes Craven's 'The Hills Have Eyes' is a prime example of a remake which betters the original in every respect. 'The Crazies' is another. George Romero's shambling and rather talkative film was remade into a shocking and action packed movie that sped forth from the get go with some amazing and shocking moments that kept up the momentum throughout the whole film. 'Maniac' and Savini's 'Night of the Living Dead' also improve on the original movies.

A strange one is 'Rob Zombie's Halloween'. As many of you reading this will know, Carpenter's 'Halloween' is the only film that scares me. But even so, I still enjoy Rob Zombies vision in both his remake of the first Halloween, and his sequel. It gives Michael a realistic back story, and goes some way to humanising him. Of course, this makes him less scary to me, but it also endears him to the viewer in some way, seeing this child be treated badly by everyone except his mother and becoming catatonic as he lets his instinct to kill come to the fore, it is a much more psychological type of horror than Carpenter's well made boo machine. We actually get into the head of Michael, see what contributed to him becoming a monster. The fact that it was kept so realistic made the film all the more shocking. I understand this isn't a commonly shared opinion, but it is one that I have. Carpenter's and Zombie's films are so different, but again, the remake does nothing to effect the power of the original. The fact there is such a difference between the original and remake in this case means the two films are pretty much incomparable, save for a few characters having the same names and Michael wearing the white emotionless mask which allows the viewer to project their own fears onto it, and being a killer.

No matter how much I sing any films praises, or write how much I dislike something, it is all subjective. We all form our own opinions (well, most of us do) on what we like and don't like. What I never seem to be able to grasp is hating something before it has even seen the light of day. I don't know about you, but I have never met anyone who can predict the future, so I can never grasp this inherent hatred of any remakes that are given the green light, or even exist solely as a rumour. It is frankly ignorant and has no basis in fact whatsoever. It is simply an act of trying to show how much of a fan you are by praising something you think people hold dear, whilst tearing down what could be a very good film.

I am not asking anyone to think like me or do what I do. All I am asking is that you engage your mind before going on a tirade against something you have never even seen. No matter your opinion, if a remake is going to be made, no matter how much you complain, it will be made, and then there could be a chance that you actually like it. Wouldn't you look silly then?

Sunday, 13 July 2014

Demon Resurrection is a beautiful homage to horror both from the
seventies and eighties, filled with nudity, blood, gore, voodoo and
zombies, for something with a very small budget, something very good has
come out of it.

Grace has escaped the clutches of a Demonic cult, but not before
being impregnated by an unholy entity. Now the cult leader Toth wants
her back, and will stop at nothing to get his way...even if it means
raising the dead.

I was incredibly surprised with this movie, as the first forty-five minutes or so start off incredibly slowly, allowing you to meet the characters, and developing them. The next forty-five minutes are a barrage of zombies, boobs, voodoo and blood that is enough to whet any horror movie fans appetite for a long time after the film has finished. It may read like it is a film of two parts, but by the ending, you will be welcoming the time it allowed you to breathe before all hell breaks loose.

While all of this exposition at the start may seem unnecessary, it really does pay off, and makes the film a whole lot more enjoyable, and it certainly does well at grabbing your attention and holding it, that's for sure.

The CGI in the movie (consisting of a green mist that surrounds the zombies, and magical puffs of smoke) is not so well done, yet it doesn't take anything away from the film. The gore is incredible and it is all practical, which is always a plus. The zombies bring to mind the Templars from The Blind Dead series of films, giving off an incredibly creepy vibe anytime they appear.

Demon Resurrection uses colour to great advantage, washing the screen with greens and reds. It really helps with the seventies vibe the film pulls off so well, making the goings on almost surreal and dream-like. It never really gets boring, even with the first half of the film filled with very little horror. Because the film is so ambitious, it works wonders that other indie films simply can't compete with. I never failed to be amazed just what this movie had to offer it's viewers.

Being a horror fan for such a long time, I tend to think I have seen it all, and nothing can take me by surprise anymore, but movies such as Demon Resurrection prove me wrong and make me sit up and take note. This is indie horror at it's finest. Who needs a big budget when a film is this good? This really does put ninety-nine percent of Hollywood horror releases to shame with it's involving story, exploitation elements and downright creepy atmosphere. This really does deserve to be seen.

Stalking Miss Barlow is the newest film directed by Derek Huey, and yet again is another incredibly well made, funny and rather disturbing look at how an actress, Keefer Barlow, copes with increasingly more disturbing fans and a killer picking off crew members of the latest film she is working on, who may very well have an obsession with the alluring Keefer.

Keefer (in the film) is a jaded actress, not enjoying her time working in Indie films, and comes across as someone who has a problem with people approaching her for autographs, pictures etc (come to think of it, if I had the sort of people that approach Keefer in this movie approach me, I would probably put my guard up too). The film also throws a little off the wall humour in there, just to keep the viewers on their toes. Some of the crew seem to continually be taking cigarette breaks, while others are obsessed with the blood and boobs on set. The little bits of character shown of these people make the film feel more rounded

What this film does in its relatively short running time is something even Hollywood can't conjure up, and that is keeping the viewers interest while giving very little away. It doesn't feel the need to throw buckets of blood at the viewer, or show countless nude women. This movie tells a story, and does just that with such talent from everyone involved, that again it is impossible not to like this movie. Derek Huey, and all involved are certainly on a winning streak, and everyone shows such love and talent for the subject matter.

Stalking Miss Barlow manages to make you feel a myriad of emotions for Keefer, from a general dislike at the start, to warming to her as the movie goes on. By the end, you can really feel how much she just wants to be accepted, not only as a serious actress, but by her boyfriend too. It also makes you realise just how creepy fans can be, even though this is a fictional account, it wouldn't surprise me if this sort of thing really happened. Keefer totally steals the movie though, her attitude speaking volumes, and the emotions she goes through are so visable, you can practically feel them grabbing you by the shoulders and screaming "Look at what they are doing to me"!

The pacing is perfect, the dialogue snappy and the killer brings to mind an unknown murderer from a Giallo movie, because they are decked in black clothing, gloves (a staple of Gialli) and a motorcycle helmet (which bought 'Strip Nude for your Killer' to mind). Everything about this movie screams fantastic.

I know I have said this before, but so far, Derek Huey has done no wrong with anything he has made so far. I am sure his star will continue to rise, as will Keefer Barlow's, as her ability to project emotion is second to none. Keep an eye out for this incredible piece of cinema, and support indie film whenever you can!